Reached Daily Limit?

Explore a new way of legal research!

Click Here
Bombay High CourtIndian Cases

Palmon Fashions And Ors. vs M.M. Verghese And Ors. on 22 September 1987

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Bombay High Court
Palmon Fashions And Ors. vs M.M. Verghese And Ors. on 22 September, 1987
Equivalent citations: (1993)IIILLJ683BOM
JUDGMENT

H.H. Kantharia, J.

1. By an award dated 22nd March, 1984, in Reference (IDA) No. 97 of 1982, the third respondent, presiding over the 4th Labour Court at Bombay, granted the relief of reinstatement with fifty per cent back wages to the first respondent-workman. It is said award that has been impugned by the petitioners in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. Admittedly, the first respondent was reinstated in pursuance of the award and, therefore, the only point now canvassed by Mr. Dixit, learned Advocate, appearing for the petitioners, is that the impugned award to the extent of granting fifty per cent back wages to the first respondent is bad in law. Thus, in the submission of Mr. Dixit the impugned award to that extent is bad in law because the petitioners had offered employment to the first respondent during his period of forced unemployment but the first respondent did not accept it and, therefore, the third respondent was not correct in passing an award of fifty per cent back wages. I am not able to persuade myself to agree with the submission of Mr. Dixit for the simple reason that the petitioners made a conditional offer of employment to the first respondent in the sense that he was called back to report for duty without continuity of service and back wages. The first respondent was, therefore, right in refusing such a conditional offer. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention of Mr. Dixit that the first respondent should not have been granted fifty per cent of the back wages. As a matter of fact, going through the award, I am of the opinion that this was a case for full back wages but the third respondent granted only fifty per cent back wages to the first respondent and the same has not been challenged by the first respondent.

3. In this view of the matter, I find no substance in this writ petition. The impugned award passed by the third respondent granting fifty per cent of the back wages to the first respondent is confirmed. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. Rule is accordingly discharged with cost of Rs. 500/- to the first respondent.